Search Results
6/9/2025, 7:01:19 AM
>>17748963
>Yeah a study which examines the age of the first orgasm and little boys messing around with each other is not conclusive evidence to assume any proportion of children desire sex with an adult
Never claimed it did. Your talmudry was not successful.
>the rest of your post
No, I just think that little boys are sexy. I did when I was a boy as well. That is all. Has nothing to do with your Judeo-Feminist theory about power dynamics. Pedophiles exist. Deal with it.
>>17748967
>He selected for cases where the subject did not state that contact was unwanted and also rejected those with any clinical or legal history.
No he didn't, retard. Thanks for confirming that you haven't even read the abstract of the study which you are pretending to argue against the merits of, which is odd, being that you've spent the last couple of days pretending to be arguing against the conclusions of the study.
>>17748971
I'm not making absurd claims such as that children "medically" can not consent to sex because I'm not a """science""" worshiping bugman who believes that medical science can make ethical statements. I might use empirical evidence from the medical sciences to support ethical statements, but I do not claim that medical science alone can make these statements. You have to be a soi guzzling bugman Redditor in a marvel t-shirt to do something like that.
>Yeah a study which examines the age of the first orgasm and little boys messing around with each other is not conclusive evidence to assume any proportion of children desire sex with an adult
Never claimed it did. Your talmudry was not successful.
>the rest of your post
No, I just think that little boys are sexy. I did when I was a boy as well. That is all. Has nothing to do with your Judeo-Feminist theory about power dynamics. Pedophiles exist. Deal with it.
>>17748967
>He selected for cases where the subject did not state that contact was unwanted and also rejected those with any clinical or legal history.
No he didn't, retard. Thanks for confirming that you haven't even read the abstract of the study which you are pretending to argue against the merits of, which is odd, being that you've spent the last couple of days pretending to be arguing against the conclusions of the study.
>>17748971
I'm not making absurd claims such as that children "medically" can not consent to sex because I'm not a """science""" worshiping bugman who believes that medical science can make ethical statements. I might use empirical evidence from the medical sciences to support ethical statements, but I do not claim that medical science alone can make these statements. You have to be a soi guzzling bugman Redditor in a marvel t-shirt to do something like that.
Page 1